Armine Harutyunyan was born in Armenia, being a 23 old non-professional model. On her Instagram profile, she is portrayed very casually in everyday life. She is an illustrator but was chosen by Gucci for the fashion show in Milan and the spring/summer collection. Now, she is a victim of body shaming because her face does not correspond to traditional beauty standards. She is further away from the models of perfection to which much of advertising and social media have accustomed us.
She said: “Better to be different than approved for the rest,” making the Roman salute in a selfie, in front of the Altar of the Fatherland in Rome.
Nancy DeMoss Wolgemuth is a Christian radio host and author.
Nancy presents her book: The Incomparable Christ.
She recants that scientists have come up with a universal standard for beauty. In math is known as phi or “golden ratio,” an irrational number. Even plastic surgeons have developed phi masks that are a model for the ideal human face according to this divine ratio.
Nature (and so God), she says, define the ideal attractive female face:
- the eye width should be three-tenths the width of the face at the eyes’ level
- the chin-length should be one-fifth the height of the face
- [… bla, bla, bla]
How beautiful are you? It depends on how further you are from this ideal of perfection.
But beauty, as Greek Philosphers suggested before, is also moral perfection, so the first chapter of her book is: “The Moral Perfection of Christ.”
He is the Model of all that is fair, all that is truly beautiful. He is the only “Perfect Ten.” Everything about Him is in perfect symmetry, perfect balance, perfect proportion. He is the only one who does not need any enhancements. He could not be any more excellent than He is.
In the Song of Songs, that speak of the coming Chirst, at verse 10, a clear portait of Him is given: “My beloved is white and ruddy, chief among ten thousand.”
There is no one else like Him.
The model is beautiful. It’s the clothes that are ugly.
Paradiso, XXXI, 108 :: Jorge Luis Borges
Mankind has lost a face, an irretrievable face, and all have longed to be that pilgrim — imagined in the Empyrean, beneath the Rose — who in Rome sees the Veronica and murmurs in faith, “Lord Jesus, my God, true God, is this then what Thy face was like?”
Beside a road there is a stone face and an inscription that says, “The True Portrait of the Holy Face of the God of Jaen.” If we truly knew what it was like, the key to the parables would be ours and we would know whether the son of the carpenter was also the Son of God.
Paul saw it as a light that struck him to the ground; John, as the sun when it shines in all its strength; Teresa de Jesus saw it many times, bathed in tranquil light, yet she was never sure of the color of His eyes.
We lost those features, as one may lose a magic number made up of the usual ciphers, as one loses an image in a kaleidoscope, forever. We may see them and know them not. The profile of a Jew in the subway is perhaps the profile of Christ; perhaps the hands that give us our change at a ticket window duplicate the ones some soldier nailed one day to the cross.
Perhaps a feature of the crucified face lurks in every mirror; perhaps the face died, was erased, so that God may be all of us.
Who knows but that tonight we may see it in the labyrinth of dreams, and tomorrow not know we saw it.
[From Dreamtigers, by Jorge Luis Borges, translated by Mildred Boyer]
Armine Harutyunyan says that in our society being different is not a problem. It’s a blessing.
Being gay, being black, being handicapped. So, being different is a quality, not a defect.
What makes you different creates a distance between you and other’s approval. But also – she says – that being denied, being rejected is an absolute. It’s not about sticking to what you are no matter what but opposing others’ judgment upon you.
Hence the paradox, even if not approved by others you’re still defined (in the negative term) by them. You are not untarnished.
Nancy DeMoss Wolgemuth embraces science and math to the extent that what she sees pleases her (also aesthetically.)
Since there’s no way you can derive the moral perfection of Christ from the NT she uses the old trick to read the Old Testament as a foreshadowing of the future Jesus. A clear portrait of Him has been depicted to the extent that there is no one else like Him.
Armine says that it’s better to be different since we’re all unique.
Nancy says that Jesus is unique and we can’t reach his state of (moral) completion. And we’re different since we’re not perfect.
They both are sisters in deeds.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)